Good morning. Prior to the holidays, Keir Starmer had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on government efforts to reduce the living expenses. He outlined this case recently in a piece where he cited steps including proposals to cut energy bills. Unfortunately, his cost of living PR blitz has been overshadowed of the news agenda by the former US president, and his distinct approach to ensuring his voters get access to affordable power.
Not a single figure in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on embracing the Trump approach – which is probably a positive development for other nations.
But there is an intense debate under way about what the UK government should be willing to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone anticipated to be more compliant with US demands, especially in regarding the country’s oil industry.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Last night, European Union members except one nation issued a collective declaration which, while not overtly critical, did stress the importance of global rules, and by implication accuse Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members call for calm and restraint by all actors, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful resolution to the crisis.
The EU recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the United Nations charter must be respected. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a particular responsibility to uphold those principles, as a pillar of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an interview round this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Maduro extradition broke global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp responded:
Not at all. UK ministers is, and will, be in conversations with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also consulting with key partners examining the juridical dimension of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, the chair of the Commons foreign affairs committee (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and the Chinese president, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer refusing to say that Trump was in violation of global rules, she said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “multiple factors”. But she was in a separate situation because she was not a minister, she said. She went on:
Ultimately there is no getting away from it. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well wish to listen to what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of us and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the schedule for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish opposition leader, and Scottish Tory leader, are also giving talks, at mid-morning and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Holyrood elections in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is due to speak to the media.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes queries in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a update to MPs about Venezuela.
